Moderator Note I'm going to go ahead and approve this post, but please contact a moderator about changing your screen name to match your real name (a requirement for continued posting). Also, please introduce yourself in the "Introductions" forum if you have not yet done so.

**********

I'm having trouble translating this text (can be found in PG vol.44 pg. 64.C):

Don't bother -- based on this text, it looks as though it's basically σκύβαλον, and can't be trusted. Translation:

"For I surmise that some do not have a good understanding of the goal of his [Basil's] compositions in The Six Day Creation Account, since they charge that he has not given to them a clear knowledge of the sun, how after three days the star was not created with the other stars, that it is not possible to obtain a correct measure of the day by means of "evening and morning" unless altogether the sun would make it evening by setting, morning by rising."

[Full disclosure: I was very glad to see the Latin translation in Migne, which clarified a couple of possible ambiguities. Latina regit!]

I think μήτε and οὐτε are used here as simple negatives in their clauses, and not used correlatively. πῶς is an indirect question explaining what it means that Basil has not given clear knowledge of the sun, and ὡς is used to give further explanation to what the πῶς clause means.

Thanks! Yes, I realized pretty quickly that the one available online translation is no good. The latin is helpful, but my latin is beginner level, so it becomes its own project to translate that too. Latina regat, nullam autem civitatem habeo. Also, sorry for the typo.

Ok, it's helpful to know the μήτε and οὔτε aren't coordinated. That helps me sort out the rest.